All religionists are obviously going to lobby against sexual perversion; they would be failing in what they see as their duty if they did not. That this author is railing against the obvious is a waste of his own hot air. The fact that there is any discussion at all about ‘gay rights’ is a waste of time - time that could be spent on far more important matters affecting normal, decent people who really don’t want to know what ‘gay’ people get up to as long as they don’t infect the rest of us.

Bleating on about “religious conservatives” has become as boring as the proverbial bat manure. My own tolerance of religion is close enough to zero, but if there needs to be a toss up between homosexuals and religionists (often misguided, but usually sincere and decent) I’ll settle for the relative harmlessness of religion any day.

My opinion is that homosexuality is an unnatural abomination - and I’m an atheist

Leigh

Just as well your are an atheist because you wouldn't get to heaven with your level of bigotry

Unfortunately, they are just one of hunderds of minority groups and whilst they have some impact, it is not as major as the pinks would have us believe.

Yes its important, but not as important as the views of the silent majority who may not entirely agree with these views, therefore Johnny and Kevvie wont be swooning them or making promises thats for sure.

Greetings,

I extend my thanks to the author of this accurate article. The research/insights are correct in my view as an analytic psychotherapist and living in a suburban area with many gay people.

Re: Comment

I feel profoundly sorry for you in your hated. You are incredibly wrong on many counts:

1. A growing number of people with religious beliefs, like my parents (elders of the Church), completely accepts gay people and do not fail in their duty as Christians by simply not being a bigot. They express love, understanding and acceptance.

2. Wow, where do we start here… Firstly we need to replace ‘gay’ rights with ‘human rights’, it is at the core of this issue and same sex couples are, believe it or not Leigh… human beings. The definition of ‘normal’ is certainly debated and in psychologically accepted terms being homosexual is rather normal for around 10% or the world’s population. In terms of decent people?.. Well I assume we are not talking about you so we should move on to the next some what inflammatory and idiocy exposing point. You seem to care a lot about what homosexuals ‘get up to’ as that sort of thing was not mentioned at all in the article, careful Leigh you might protest too much there. In relation to infection; I would think the danger of incredible stupidity virus (ISV) is great! Take precautions Leigh, perhaps a finger and mouth restraining apparatus?

3. Perhaps before you ‘toss’ anything up you should have a little look back on the last 3000 odd years of history and have a look at just how innocuous (means harmless Leigh) religion has been – You certainly don’t see gay people strapping themselves with gelignite and running into cafes.

My opinion is that you are a bigot and your thinking is an abomination – I am a free thinking behavioralist .

And rest assured I will be using my considerable resources and influence to support even your rights as a human regardless of your beliefs.

thinks4self,

You and others may carry on your homosexual practices; there is no law against it in Australia. But, please: keep it to yourselves. The rest of us are bored rigid with gay squealing

Personally I have more respect for Bob Brown than Mr Rudd on this issue. Why? Because though I have opposite views to him he does not put on some mask and hide behind being a 'liberal Christian' hoping to somehow gain the votes of those who find homosexual behaviour wrong. I have to agree with the author that while I admire the Australian Christian Lobby they are wasting a lot of money and time trying to get straight answers from pollies who are often to gutless to make a stand one way or the other. Our local Liberal candidate is like that. It does give me a dilemma on who to vote for believe it or not.

Leigh. You claim to be sick of 'gay squealing'. Has it ever occured to you but clearly not, that the media is clogged and at saturation point with heterosexual sqealing. In comparison, the so-called 'gay squaling' is but a whisper.

Leigh must be posing as a bigot to gain a response and cannot be for real with the comment: 'the harmlessness of religion'. More than any other human force in the world, religion is the scourge of mankind. The blood-stained history of religion makes it a curse not a blessing. Children frightened of the dark is what I regard believers in the impossible - such as deities and the afterlife. Such monumental egos they possess to imagine that if they conform to a distorted interpretation of writings by ancient, desert-dwelling people, they will go to heaven. Spare me the sight and company of such types in their nighties and continual harping.But what god do they worship who makes them want to persecute others for a sexual expression that harms no-one?

Leigh your response to the post was apalling. as said in other comments gay people are people first and whatever their sexual preference, a distant second. despite what you may like to think, their human rights are equal to yours. i find it difficult to comprehend that in the 21st century there are still people with such views.
if the gay population is approximately 10% (as stated in one comment) they constitute a sizeable minority and perhaps politicians should be paying closer attention to their rights. they could make or break a lot of parliamentary careers.

Lyndon, while I might agree with you on many points, I have to take issue with your comment "a sexual expression that harms no-one". I suggest you have a read at
http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats04/trends2004.htm
and have a look at the incidence of sexually transmitted diseases particularly gonorrhea and syphilis, caused by "same sex" contact.

David

An interesting article. As for homosexual bleating, not a patch on the volume of religion that is pushed on society on a regular basis.

- I've never been door knocked by someone trying to get me to turn gay.
- If I happen to want to watch some telly on a sunday morning most stations are not full of programs celebrating gayness.
- My son's school does not have a gay club handing out lollies to get kids to attend so that gayness can be promoted to them.
- I'm not aware of someone who is openly gay ever being Prime Minister or Governor General.
- People don't offer me a gay time as we finish a conversation.
- I'm not aware of gays thinking that it is important for them to lobby to have other peoples sexual activities regulated.
- I don't recall any wars that have been started to promote one variety of gayness over another.

If a groups activities need legal regulation it's not the gay communities activities that need that regulation but rather those who seek to impose their own fantasies on others.

R0bert

You have obviously never been near Sydney's Gay Mardi Gras.

David

David, no I have not. One of the good things is that I have a choice, no one tries to force it down my throat or impose it on me.

Australia has I understand it one major annual celebration for gays. Mostly my exposure to that event is a mention on the evening news and some posts on the forums by homophobes condemming the event.

I see some articles on this forum (and other parts of the media) seeking certain legal protections for people in gay relationships (the same legal protections covering heterosexuals) and some coverage of gay entertainers but mostly gays leave me alone and don't impose their choices on me.

That is a marked contrast to the activities of the churches with their constant and intrusive promotion of their views.

R0bert

VK3AUU: "You have obviously never been near Sydney's Gay Mardi Gras"

Er, why would you go to the Gay Mardi Gras and not expect to mix with gay people? That'd be a bit like going to Hillsong and complaining about the happyclappers.

Very well said indeed, R0bert :)

Once again a rant from Leigh,

"Bleating on about “religious conservatives” has become as boring as the proverbial bat manure. My own tolerance of religion is close enough to zero, but if there needs to be a toss up between homosexuals and religionists (often misguided, but usually sincere and decent) I’ll settle for the relative harmlessness of religion any day."

How many young children have been damaged for life by these, "(often misguided, but usually sincere and decent)" people, who you rank higher than homosexuals only because they agree with you on this subject, with no regard for their sexual leanings.

Leigh you, like so many men afraid of seeming even slightly gay, wear your Homophobia like a badge of honour, but methinks you do protest too much. But with so many other similar badges on your breast it must be hard to know what you really are. You certainly have another one labelled "Religionists", and one maybe for global warming believers, people over 75, and so on.

No I am not gay, but I do want a world where people like you and others can exist without the sort of diatribe that you, judging by this and other posts of yours, hold so dear.

Ulysses

"The rest of us are bored rigid with gay squealing" -- Leigh.

Leigh, if the supposed squealing "bores you rigid" then it is pertinent to
ask why you are so compelled to be
a)the first poster on this forum and
b)waiting to strike with a rebuttal to what you know to be a provocative
comment.

However, please do not propose to speak for "the rest of us". Unless, of
course, "us" refers to the inner demons with which you wrestle.

One can plainly see that your expressions of bigotry and hatred curiously
conflict with your clear fascination for "homosexual practices". My
understanding of most homophobes is that they doth protest too loudly.

The ‘squealing’ is certainly evident from pathetic types who can’t wait to say that Leigh must really be a homo himself because he protests too much. I’ve never heard that one before, of course! And, I continue to be amused by the little darlings who take pain to assure me that they are not homosexuals themselves – just decent, concerned citizens who have been specially anointed to defend anything that is well out in left field. Lacking the ability to initiate any discussion themselves, they lurk until a suitable victim comes along – usually an older, conservative person they deem out of touch with today’s ‘beautiful people’, and one not young enough to know all the answers like the young and beautiful do.

All of you, with your idiotic pseudonyms, are living in a fools’ paradise, encouraged by a passing phase of cynical, vote-grabbing politics and complacency among the majority which you misinterpret as acceptance of your deviant behaviour and aimless hedonism.

Pendulums do swing, however, and the rise of conservative Christianity and its growing influence on politics is just the beginning. You fear that. And so you should. It will be a mere irritation to old farts like me, but it will be your nemesis. I just hope I’m around long enough to enjoy the show. If the fundamentalist Christians don’t get you, the Muslims will

The percentage of homosexuals living in Australia is 2.04%. At the last census the number of people who conisdered themselves christian was 67%. It makes sense that the majority should have more sway on how the country is run.

That aside, consideration needs to be taken on how the lives of homosexual & lesbian people affect others. I am especially concerned about the effects of such relationships on children. At 2.04% you can't say that homosexual orientation is normal. If you ask the person on the street whether they would prefer their child to become a homosexual/lesbian or live in a heterosexual relationship you would find the majority preferred the latter. Despite this I don't think many Aussies are really aware of how detrimental the push for same-sex marriage is. In it's essence it undermines the commitment of a marriage relationship by saying any kind of relationship goes. Will polygamy be next? Children are raised best in a secure environment with one mother and one father. This is something which has been proved to be essential to the development of the child. See http://www.family.org/socialissues/A000001142.cfm

I am not saying we should shun homosexual/lesbian people just because we think they are wrong though. A person's attitude to sexual orientation is never an indication to disrespect the person themselves. However, there should always be a place for debate and people should be prepared make their views plain with logical argument without attacking the person presenting them. (We get enough of that in parliament!)

In regards to Leigh's post:

-Stating that posters who say they're not gay must be homophobes: 22 words.
-Claiming old white conservatives (who run the world) are the real victims: 46 words.
-Launching a bitter empty spray against posting nicknames: 7 words.
-Saying you look forward to the rise of fundamentalist christianity or Islam, simply for the sake of revenge against liberals (now that's some hardcore bitterness): 50 words.

Making a fool of yourself by saying nothing relevant to the topic at hand?: Priceless.

R0bert said it very well. It's not about promoting homosexuality, this appears to be the bit the diehard conservatives find hard to accept. It's about letting them be and realising it's their business, not yours.

And Merry, don't worry - if fundamentalist Christians are so worried about alleged health problems associated with a homosexual or promiscuous lifestyle, then surely the chaste no-sex-before-marriage christians will be spared and it's just those rascally heathens who will be affected, so really, you should be encouraging it.

R0bert, your first post articulated exactly my sentiments.

Leigh, for 'an old fart' you haven't mellowed much over the years. Have you lived much?

Gay rights are long overdue to be changed to human rights. The simple legal acknowledgment alone of a 'marriage' between same sex couples would eliminate a whole barrage of painful injustices.

Personal spiritual beliefs as with personal sexual beliefs should remain in the realm of the personal. It is not for any other to determine what is morally 'right' spiritually or sexually for another adult.

VK3AUU, syphilis and gonorrhoea are not “caused by "same sex" contact”. They are caused by bacteria which are transmitted sexually.

Every disease has characteristics which enable it to spread more easily in particular populations. We don’t discriminate against overweight people because they are more susceptible to Type 2 diabetes http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/dm/pubs/riskfortype2/

Similarly we don’t discriminate against left-handed people because they are more accident prone.

Why single out one group? If you’re going to blame same-sex-attracted people because they are disproportionately affected by some conditions, you should also be blaming overweight people for their diabetes, smokers for their poor circulation and left-handed people for their accident rates.

Just as left-handers are more prone to accident because they “live in a world where things are set up to favour right handers,” http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1768179.stm it’s difficult to target homosexuals with health education messages because they are embedded in a heterosexual world. It’s not their fault, and it’s spectacularly uncompassionate for you to blame them for this.

Merry, one of the principles of democracy is that majorities aren’t allowed to ride roughshod over minorities. It is absolutely correct to protect the rights of a 2.04% minority, in the same way we protect the rights of the 10 - 15% who are left-handed, and the 21% who are obese http://www.aihw.gov.au/riskfactors/overweight.cfm

The claim that children are “raised best in a secure environment with one mother and one father” requires more support than your focus on the family link provides, especially in the face of the mounting evidence that same-sex parenting is just as good as opposite-sex parenting http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/533580/?sc=lwhn If you’ve got some real evidence, by all means provide it, but please spare us FOTF’s anti-gay polemic.

Wonderful post, Robert

In Wenworth we have a choice between Malcolm Turnbull: Liberal and George Newhouse: ALP. While Turnbull has literally been grovelling to the pink vote, making sure that he has been in the gay media for most of the year. Advertising expensive adds in gay media. And articles parroting that he has always been pro gay, would always support gay marriage and all pro gay anti discrimination including in the Church. Many of his campaign managers including Shane Mallard, a Gay Liberal member of the Sydney City Council insist that the Liberals are more gay than the ALP. I have interviews on my saintfletcher YouTube channel which shows this quite clearly.

Meanwhile, George Newhouse is being criticized for not groveling to the gay vote enough. He stutters in claiming that we can assume his support for his gay voters and takes a general policy view on issues. He does confess that he would follow Tanya Plibersek on whatever she does but not on his own initiative. Newhouse is spending most time and money on the Jewish Russian vote in the Seat of Wentworth. Many hours and money are spent on cinema advertising and we assume, MySpace or YouTube spoken in Russian. This has still not been released or uploaded. Even Bob Hawke had to speak Russian.

Who is conservative?

This is in, supposedly, the pink triangle of the gay vote in Australia. On YouTube, The Greens candidate: Susan, Jarmerson, invests her whole argument that if we don't vote for her, the wedge tail eagles in Tasmania will die. So "they can't wait" for your vote. Seriously.

The author of this article claims that homosexual couples are moving into the "mortgage belt", finding acceptance, and are leading pretty normal lives.

The claim that they are becoming suburbanites could be true, for all I know. But my critical analysis and skepticism circuit is sounding a warning bell, and I prefer to wait for more data on that one. However, in Sydney the suburb of Darlighurst is a noted poofta area which also boasts Australia's highest rate of cocaine arrests. It was also the electorate with then highest proportion of voters agreeing with the concept that Australia should become a republic.

As for acceptance, that is probably true. Homosexual people are noted for their high levels of creative intelligence and they are especially prominent in the arts and media. Smart people tend to be successful people, and in our society, succesful people have money. Therefore, the "acceptance" that homosexuals are claiming where pubs are flying "rainbow flags" is simply a product of the fact that business people like people with money to spend.

Politically, pooftas tend to be overwhelmingly left wing, probably because they see themselves as a persecuted minority, so they will always go into bat for any other "persecuted" minority, as well as always attacking the socially accepted conventions of "straight" society.

What is interesting about the "gay vote", is that in Europe, the poofs are turning more right wing. However much pooftas despise white European society, they have come to realise that the importation of homosexual hating Muslims is not in their interests, for two reasons.

The first, is that none of them relish being stoned to death.

The second, is that creative people tend to demand intellectual freedom and also demand that all censorship be abolished, as they consider censorship to be a threat to their livelihood. That Muslim people do not believe in such concepts was highlighted by the Salmon Rushdie affair, and the Danish cartoons lampooning Islam.

Redneck, you are such a silly poofter. You know that Liberal Party: William Street headquarters in Sydney is run by poofters and fag hags. Ask anyone who works there. Liberal Sydney gay Councilor, Shane Mallard jokes about this. Also, the snorting sessions in the toilets, where the cacaine helps giving them energy. That is well known. The toilet near former State opposition leader: John Brogden, sometimes had bags of cocaine carelessly left there in the toilets from where they forgot to collect the surplus.

Silly poofters. Look at John Howard with his silly poofter track suit when he walks in the morning. His silly poofter comments which are so lame. Then there is Alexander downer, the evil queen of silly pooftery in the Liberal party. I bet she has a good time in Asian conferences. We all know that former Deputy PM Doug Anthony did. You don't catch HepB from fried rice, you get it from kissing the wrong end of young Asian boys.

So it is all not what it seems, is it? Bloody poofters! They already run the country, and you are worried about the ALP?

Redneck. As a poofter who has just spent six months in Europe, I can assure you "BUTCH Redneck!", the European poofters are still fighting for social justice for all poofters around the world.

By the way did you know that they hang teenage gays for being gay in the middle east, and the sucicide rate for teenage gays in Australia has not reduced, especially in rural Australian areas. Gays and lesbians are still being bashed and murdered around the world, as well as Australia. There again, I'm sure this is concern to you!

Just thought you would like to know, me not being a left,right or centre. Me just a poofter who accepts you for what you are!

Hilarious. 'Left wing poofters' indeed.

Just ask David Flint, Alan Jones, Christopher Pearson... and that's just off the top of my head.

Seriously, I think that homosexuality is probably spread across the political spectrum, as it is in society. Politically, it would only count where parties (and their local representatives) are seen to be anti-gay, rather than pro-equality.

I really don't think homosexuality is the major election issue - this time anyway - that some would like it to be.

I've been trying to work out if Leigh's post from the other day is worth responding to. Undecided so I'll go anyway, it's sunday night and why not.

"I continue to be amused by the little darlings who take pain to assure me that they are not homosexuals themselves"
- Possibly because most want you to understand that it's not just gays who care about this issue.

"they lurk until a suitable victim comes along – usually an older, conservative person they deem out of touch with today’s ‘beautiful people’, and one not young enough to know all the answers like the young and beautiful do." - about as valid as one of Leigh's beloved lefties taking their kids to the front of a protest rally and then trying to blame the cops because their kids were exposed to the turmoil at the front of the rally. Leigh playing the victim, not so convincing.

"And so you should. It will be a mere irritation to old farts like me, but it will be your nemesis." - I'm old enough and conservative enough in my personal habits that it probably won't impact on me a lot. I would like my son to grow up in a world where his choices are not determined by the superstitions of others or the petty narrowness of others who need to suppress that which is different.

In regard to the suggestions that Leigh's homophobia may be indicating some denial his part a quick scan of web based material suggested a variety of causes for homophobia (some of which are not about an attraction for gay sex). Others are homophobic because of religious convictions or personal disgust at an act that should never be their business.

For some additional reading
- http://gayequalityandthelaw.townhall.com/g/f5ac65d4-8d30-4720-b8b6-6c2014ea87c2
- http://mentalhealth.about.com/library/sci/0602/blhomo602.htm
- http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0092656606000080
- http://www.leaonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15327582ijpr1401_5

R0bert

Respect for gay people requires nothing more than providing equal legal obligations and benefits to all Australians regardless of their sexuality.

Candidates for elected office can demonstrate commitment to the human rights of all citizens they represent by agreeing to vote for the repeal of all discriminatory laws identified by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission.

Leigh you astound me with your naivety or total ignorance
“I’ll settle for the relative harmlessness of religion any day.” you say.
Where are the gay wars around the world? Where are the great gay accumulations of wealth that churches hoard in the name of “the church” hoards that could have been distributed to the poor as a "Christian act"
To prefer religion to homosexuality because of some silly little sexual hangup is just plain silly.